Finally, Ofcom accepted the market logic of the positions of Channels 3 and 5 in the new digital age and recommended reducing their commitments to public service broadcasting, especially the provision of regional and children’s programming (Nicholas & Siân 1996, p. 59). At this point we make a distinction between public service and public television. Although often omitted, it is true that, generally, all the television activity is considered public service so much of the legislation applies equally to all stations regardless of the legal ownership of it, for example, the emission maximum advertising or inability to deliver violent programs before ten at night.
However, as we know, not all stations are publicly owned. The latter is supposed to have additional commitments established society, sometimes annually, for its control and guardianship bodies (often the parliaments of political representation). However, in this paper, we will discuss the alarming question of today’s era, i.e., what is the future of public service broadcasting?
The Public Service Broadcasting is the basis of the dual broadcasting system. As an important part of democracy, he is indispensable and irreplaceable. But the public broadcasters are increasingly criticized. Political and governmental influences are felt particularly in the broadcasting sector. It will be broadcast to a few cultural programs, which leads to a flattening of content. Cultural reporting takes place at night or in addition to programs. The public broadcaster has long ceased to reach the majority of the population.
最后，Ofcom接受通道3和5在新的数字时代的位置，市场逻辑，建议减少自己的承诺，公共服务广播，特别是区域和儿童节目的规定（尼古拉斯和SiâN 1996，p. 59）。在这一点上我们做的公共服务和公共电视的区别。虽然经常被忽略，这是真的，一般来说，所有的电视活动被认为是公共服务如此多的立法同样适用于所有站无论是法律上的所有权，例如，最大发射广告或无法交货的暴力节目在晚上十点。